An Empire is headed by an Emperor crowned by the pope of Rome, a nation state can be headed by pretty much annyone. In most cases Empires contain multiple nationalities and stretch over vast territories, nation states are often smaller in size and have only a few nationalities. An Empire is always a monarchy while a nation state could also be a republic. Empires are in most cases build on warfare, nation states don't have to be. Etc Etc...

..So, it follows there never was an ancient "Roman Empire" (pre.christian - and before the popes)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering

most cases Empires contain multiple nationalities and stretch over vast territories, nation states are often smaller in size and have only a few nationalities.

What is India then?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeroenrottgering

An Empire is always a monarchy while a nation state could also be a republic. Empires are in most cases build on warfare, nation states don't have to be. Etc Etc...

The ancient Roman Emperors after Augustus were not, at least formally, Kings, and usually the next one was not the son of the previous, though there are counterexamples (as some modern presidents had parents that were presidents themselves).
A couple of centuries ago most europeans were subjects to kings (an a few "emperors) ruling many ethic groups, like the british, Swedish, danish, Spanish and more kings.

I think the most striking distinction between the two is that an empire, at some stage in its rise to power, forcefully absorbs "others" or "foreigners" into its political sphere via some sort of coercion, whether it be militarily, diplomatically, economically, etc.

The nation state is formed through more natural processes; common language, traditions, ethnicity, religion, mythology, etc.

Of course you can point to exceptions, as there are exceptions to every rule, but imho this is the typically the deciding factor.

I think the most striking distinction between the two is that an empire, at some stage in its rise to power, forcefully absorbs "others" or "foreigners" into its political sphere via some sort of coercion, whether it be militarily, diplomatically, economically, etc.

The nation state is formed through more natural processes; common language, traditions, ethnicity, religion, mythology, etc.

Of course you can point to exceptions, as there are exceptions to every rule, but imho this is the typically the deciding factor.

It would be nice to agree upon that "natural" almost peacefully view, but I think if we look closer the use of force has been one of the most significant factors (an understatement) for the history of almost every nation-state, though there are some examples issues were not settled on the battlefield. The same can be said for monarchies and empires: sometimes they did not expand by wars, but by other means, like marriages.

It would be nice to agree upon that "natural" almost peacefully view, but I think if we look closer the use of force has been one of the most significant factors (an understatement) for the history of almost every nation-state, though there are some examples issues were not settled on the battlefield.

I disagree. Naturally does not have to imply peacefully. In fact, humanity is naturally quite violent. The difference, as I see it at least,is that the Empire rules a subjected people while the Nation State benefits from a common unity other then coercion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fantasus

The same can be said for monarchies and empires: sometimes they did not expand by wars, but by other means, like marriages.

I do believe the Roman, British, Russian, and German empires beg to differ.

An Empire is a state ruled by an emperor. An emperor can take power, or he can be elected by a Senate (Rome and France for example). An empire can be for one nation, or many nations.

A nation state is a state founded for a nation. A nation is a collectivity of people with a common history and culture, and almost always the same language and ethnicity. Of course there are non-ethnic nation states, but only immigrant nations fill this category (USA, Canada, Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Chile). France is a nation state too, but I'm not so sure what the French are ethnically.

Anyways, even within immigrant nation states there are other nations. The USA has the natives and the Dixons (the south). Canada has their natives and the Quebecois.

France is a nation state too, but I'm not so sure what the French are ethnically.

Without looking it up and from memory, (and i could be incorrect in my recital - so any citation is most welcome); But before the Rise of Rome and the coming of Germanic tribe known as the Franks after the fall of Rome... they were known as a tribe of Celts, also known to us as the Gauls.

The difference, as I see it at least,is that the Empire rules a subjected people while the Nation State benefits from a common unity other then coercion.

There is often disagreement inside nation states about the claims of "common unity". There are ethnic or national minorities almost everywhere, and for me it does not seems very clear who among them are "natural" nations and who are not.And large parts of the peoples of "nation-states" may often be coerced and forced to submission as well as populations of what is usually seen as "empires".